PHL 2/102

1

Logic Class Notes
I. Philosophy:
a. Etymological definition: philo/philein (to love); Sophia (wisdom) -
Pythagoras
b. Real definition: the science of all things by their ultimate causes and
principles as known by natural reason alone
II. Pre-Socratics: Where does everything come from?
a. Thales: water
b. Anaximander: indeterminate boundless
c. Anaximenes: air (just as our soul, being air, holds us together, so do breath
and air encompass the whole world)
d. Pythagoras: numbers (since everything is measurable and can be numbered,
then everything must have originated from numbers)
e. Heraclitus of Ephesus: fire (everything that passes through fire changes, and
since what is observable in this world is that everything changes, then it
must be that there is fire in everything) No one can step on the same river
twice.
f. Parmenides of Elea: the world consists of one indivisible thing; this One is
motionless and in perfect sphere. (Change is an illusion)
g. Empedocles: earth, air, fire, water (Being is uncreated and indestructible and
that it simply is. Change and motion are made possible because objects are
composed of many particles, which are in themselves changeless.)
h. Leucippus and Democritus of Abdera: atoms (everything was the product of
the collision of atoms moving in space)
*Pythagoras believed that every human person is incapable of knowing the
whole truth. He believed that each of these philosophers may be correct in their
views, however, they are only capable of explaining a portion of the truth but not
the whole truth.
III. Historical Development of Philosophy
a. Ancient: cosmocentric
b. Medieval: theocentric
c. Modern: ideocentric
PHL 2/102
2

d. Contemporary: anthropocentric
IV. Branches of Philosophy:
a. Logic: on correct inferential thinking and its principles
b. Epistemology: on certain and true knowledge and its principles
c. Metaphysics/Ontology: on beings in general, on the different reasons and
principles of the reality of things
d. Rational Psychology/Philosophical Anthropology: on living beings and the
principle of life, on the nature of the vital operations and of the vital powers,
and their classification
e. Cosmology/Philosophy of Nature: on the material world, and the ultimate
constituent principles of material beings
f. Aesthetics: on beauty and harmony, on value judgments about art and beauty
in general
g. Theodicy/Special Metaphysics: on the First Cause of contingent beings and of
emergent reality
h. Ethics: on human acts and their morality
i. Social/Political Philosophy: on the socialityof man, on the nature of human
society and its principles
V. Logic:
a. Etymological definition by Zeno the Stoic: Greek, logike: a treatise on matters
pertaining to thought
b. Real definition: as the science and art which helps our mind to distinguish
between the correct from the incorrect
c. To attain clarity in our thoughts; to examine the validity of arguments and
the processes of inference
VI. Historical Development of Logic:
a. The Nyaya Philosophy (Valid knowledge is defined as the right apprehension
of an object; the manifestation of the object as it is. Thus, knowledge, to be
valid, must correspond to reality. )
b. Theory of Correspondence: Knowledge is produced when the subject comes
into contact with the object. If the generating conditions are sound, the
knowledge is valid. If they are defective, knowledge is invalid.
(Kinds of Valid Knowledge)
PHL 2/102
3

i. Perception (pratyaksa): non-erroneous cognition which is produced
by the intercourse of sense-organs with the objects, which is not
associated with a name and which is well-defined
(2 Stages in Perception)
1. Indeterminate (Nirvikalpa): not associated with a name;
inanimate apprehension, the first sense-experience which is
undifferentiated, non-relational
2. Determinate (Savikalpa): well-defined; clear perception of
something with its attribute; of something as differentiated
and relational
(5 Requisites for the Realization of True Knowledge)
1. The object perceived
2. External requisites
3. The sense organs which are asserted for perception
4. The mind without which the organs cannot function
5. The subject who perceives
*Kants philosophy: Percepts without concepts are blind, and
concepts without percepts are empty.
ii. Inference (Anumana): a process of reasoning by which something
unperceived is known on the basis of what is known, the character of
which is universally applicable
(Nyaya Syllogism in Five Members)
1. First assertion/Pratijna: The hill is on fire
2. Reason/Hetu: Because it has smoke
3. Universal concomitance or instance/Udaharana: Whatever has
smoke has fire, example kitchen fire
4. Application/Upanaya: The hill has smoke which is invariably
associated with fire
5. Conclusion/Nigamana: Therefore, the hill is on fire
iii. Comparison/Analogy (Upamana): knowledge of the relation between
the word and its denotation
iv. Verbal Testimony (Sabda): statement of a trustworthy person and
consists in understanding its meaning
PHL 2/102
4

(2 Kinds of Testimony)
1. Vaidika Testimony: found in the Vedas, considered infallible
for they are taken to be the words of God
2. Secular Testimony: words of human beings, this liable to error
(Criteria for a Trustworthy Person)
1. The person has no intention to deceive
2. The statement of such person is not a gross contradiction to
what is already accepted as true
3. The person has established his trustworthiness in other
domains of life
(Sources of Invalid Knowledge)
i. Memory
ii. Doubt
iii. Error
iv. Hypothetical Reasoning
c. Pre-Aristotelian Logic in Greece
i. After the concern on the problem of the origin of the universe, the
philosophers turned their attention to the possibility of acquiring
knowledge and on determining the validity of their thought-
experiences.
ii. Thus, the use of arguments or logic.
iii. Eleatics (Zeno of Elea); Sophists (Protagoras, Gorgias, Thrasymachus);
Megarics (Euclides of Megara)
iv. Zeno as founder of Dialectics
d. Aristotelian Logic
i. Aristotle (Father of Logic) made the art of argumentation into a
system.
ii. Organon: collection of Aristotles (6)treatises on reasoning
VII. Logic: Nature and Divisions
a. Material Object: items or things that the science covers in its study (ex:
Arithmetic: numbers)
PHL 2/102
5

i. Logics material object: concepts and conceptual structures
(propositions and syllogisms) taken as products of the mind and not
as psychical affections or accidental modifications of the mind
b. Formal Object: the primary object of its study or consideration, by reason of
which, the science discusses the different items that fall under its study (ex:
addition, subtraction, multiplication, division in Arithmetic)
i. Logics formal object: the inferential functions of concepts and
propositions
ii. Logic views concepts in their functions (Major, Minor, and Middle
Terms) and propositions as Major and Minor Premises of an
inferential conceptual structure which is the Syllogism. Such
inferential functions are also called Relations of Reasons, inasmuch as
they properly exist only in the mind that attains and considers them.
c. Traditional/Aristotelian Logic and Symbolic Logic
i. Traditional/Aristotelian Logic: uses syllogistic method, which is
typically deductive because it reasons out from universal into
particular.
ii. Symbolic Logic: mathematical logic, may also be deductive in
approach; uses symbols in the analysis of the arguments in order to
easily determine the validity of such given arguments.
d. Division of Logic: logic is commonly divided according to three acts of the
mind, which provide the different elements of its subject-matter and the
different bases of the different inferential functions
Mental Act Mental Product External Sign Logical Issue
Apprehension Idea Term Predicability
Judgment Enunciation Proposition Predication
Reasoning Argument Syllogism Inference
*The mental product or expression, which falls in between the mental act and the
external sign, is often designated with the name of the one or of the other. Ex: the
enunciation is also commonly designated as judgment, or as proposition.
*Syllogism: connected thought (syn + logos)
d. Formal Logic and Material Logic
PHL 2/102
6

i. In constructing anything, whether it is a suit, or a house, or even an
argument, one must have good structure or form and good material.
ii. Formal Logic discusses the conceptual patterns or structures needed
for correct and valid inference. (concerned itself with the rules
governing the structure and the validity of argument forms or
patterns)
iii. Material Logic discusses the kind of matter, that is, the nature of the
terms and premises that are used in the different kinds of
demonstration. (concerned with the meaning and truth of the concept
and sentences, which comprise a syllogism)
iv. Formal Logic coincides with our present science on correct and valid
inference. Material Logic is the philosophical discussion on matters of
thought and knowledge.
*This distinction does not mean that they are two separate kinds of logic. They are, in fact,
complementary.
*Internal and external consistency= Valid and sound argument

All human beings are Gods creature
Juan de la Cruz is a human being
Therefore, Juan de la Cruz is Gods creature.

Because it follows a sequence, this argument is valid. (Material Logic: This argument,
however, is valid only insofar as Juan de la Cruz is a human being. But if Juan de la Cruz is a
name of a puppet or a dog, the argument would not be sound.)

All Filipinos are God-fearers.
Jose Rizal is a Filipino.
Therefore, Apolinario Mabini is a God-fearer.

Because it has no sequence, this argument is invalid.

e. Formal Logic and Dialectics
i. Some divide our present science of logic into Formal Logic and
Dialectics because they define Formal Logic as treatise on matters
pertaining to thought while Dialectics is the treatise on argumentation
or disputation.
PHL 2/102
7

ii. Formal Logic: covers the discussion on Ideas and Propositions
iii. Dialectics: covers the discussion on Inference and Syllogisms
f. Deductive Logic and Inductive Logic
i. This division is applicable only to the third part of logic
ii. Deductive Logic: from universal to the particular
iii. Inductive Logic: from particular to universal
VIII. Idea and Term: Meaning, Kinds of Terms, Supposition
a. Simple Apprehension: the first act by which the mind without judging
(without affirming or denying anything about the thing) forms a concept of
something;
b. Idea: the mental product of apprehension; it is the mental image of a thing; it
represents the object in the intellect
c. Term: the external manifestation of an idea; when an idea that exists in the
mind is expressed verbally
i. Simple or Complex
1. Simple: consists of a single word (ex: man)
2. Complex: consists of a group of words that signify one thing
(ex: a rational sentient animate corporeal substance)
ii. Significant or Non-Significant:
1. Significant: terms that signify concepts directly and
immediately
2. Non-significant: terms that merely indicate or point out things
without expressing its nature (demonstrative pronouns,
proper nouns, adjectives)
d. Comprehension and Extension
i. Comprehension: the sum total of the attributes or thought-elements
which constitute the idea
ii. Extension: the sum total of all the individuals, things or groups to
which the idea/term could be applied
Kinds of Extension:
PHL 2/102
8

1. Absolute Extension: the sum total of all subjectsof actual
subjects, as well as possible subjectswhose nature is
signified by the term and concept
2. Functional Extension: it includes only those subjects that it
actually sets before the mind when it is used in a discourse
Ex: Term: Pencil
Comprehension: A writing instrument consisting of a
thin stick of graphite or a similar substance enclosed in
a long thin piece of wood or fixed in a metal or plastic
case
Extension: types and brands of pencil; Monggol, etc.
e. Kinds of Terms:
i. Terms according to Extension
1. Singular: an idea that can be applied to one subject only
a. Proper Noun
b. Nouns modified by adjective in the superlative degree
(ex. The most valuable player, the wisest man in
Athens)
c. Demonstrative pronouns (this, that, those, these)
d. Article the
e. Personal Pronouns (I, you, he, she, they, we)
2. Particular: an idea that can be applied to a part or a portion of
all the members of a class
a. Indefinite pronouns or adjectives
b. Use of numbers
c. Articles a and an
d. General propositions which are true most of the time
but not always (ex: Filipinos are hospitable)
3. Universal: an idea that can be applied to all and every member
of a class
a. Universal expressions (all, every, each, whichever,
whatever, none, no one, etc.)
PHL 2/102
9

b. Universal idea
c. Articles a, an or the, if the idea is universal (ex: A
snake is a dangerous creature)
ii. Terms according to Definition
1. First Intention: a concept by which we understand what a thing
is according to what it is in reality, whether we think of the
term or not
2. Second Intention: a concept by which we understand not only
what a thing is in reality but also how it is in the mind. This
pertains to how the mind is thinking of the term in a particular
situation, independent of its essence
iii. Terms according to Comprehension
1. Concrete: an idea that expresses a nature or attribute directly
and immediately inherent in a subject usually outside the mind
of the knower
2. Abstract: an idea that can indirectly be referred to its
individual subject
iv. Terms according to Meaning
1. Absolute: terms that signify a concept of the meaning of a
complete substance endowed with its independent reality. All
definitions are absolute concepts.
2. Connotative: terms that signify a concept as an accident
existing in a substance. They present a form without a subject.
All modifiers are connotative concepts.
v. Terms according to Quality
1. Positive: a term that asserts the presence of some attributes
(ex: healthy)
2. Negative: a term that denies the presence of some attributes
(ex: unhealthy)
vi. Terms according to Manner of Meaning
1. Univocal: a term that has one and the same meaning as applied
to different extensions
2. Analogous: a term that expresses a meaning that is partly
different and partly the same, or meanings that are related
PHL 2/102
10

a. Analogous by Proportion: when a term is used in an
absolute sense in one thing and then attributed in other
things because of some intrinsic relation with the first.
Metaphorical words are classified under this kind
Ex: Healthy attributed to medicine, body, exercise, food
b. Analogous by Proportionality: (also called metaphysical
analogy) when a term is used by virtue of the kindred
similarity of the conceptual and formal reasons
denoted.
Ex: A beautiful song is not beautiful in exactly the same way
and sense as a beautiful girl.
3. Equivocal: when the term is outwardly or apparently the same,
but expressing different meanings
a. In pronunciation only: sweet-suite
b. In writing only: bow (gesture, weapon)
c. In both pronunciation and writing: ball (dance, round
toy)
vii. Terms according to Relation
1. Contradictory: terms that mutually exclude each other to such
a degree that there is no middle ground possible (lawyer, non-
lawyer)
2. Contrary: terms that signify their extreme relations but
belonging to the same class. They allow for a middle ground.
(black and white)
3. Privative: terms in which one expresses perfection and the
other, the denial of that perfection in its proper subject that
ought to have that perfection (sight, blindness)
4. Correlative: terms whose meanings are mutually related to
each other in such a way that the meaning of one is in
reference to the other and vice-versa (mother-daughter)
f. Supposition of Terms
i. Supposition: the precise meaning a term bears in a sentence
ii. Proper Supposition: when a term stands for something for which it is
permitted to stand for literally
PHL 2/102
11

1. Material: when a word is taken simply to signify the spoken
word or the written symbol (ex: To run is a verb.)
2. Formal
a. Logical: when a term refers to a thing in mental
existence (ex: Man is a universal idea)
b. Real: when a term refers to a thing in real existence
(The sun rises every morning.)
iii. Improper Supposition: when a term stands for something
metaphorically and from its use in speech (Augustine is a Seraphic
Doctor of the Church)
g. Definition of Terms:
i. Nominal Definition: expresses what the name means, not what the
thing is. It circumscribes the precise meaning of a given word without
going into the real nature of the word
1. Etymological Definition: a definition that gives the origin of the
word (Ex: Philosophy is the love of wisdom because it came
from the words philein which means to love and sophia
which means wisdom)
2. Synonymous Definition: this gives the same connotation of the
term. This kind of definition is so exact that it replaces a term
with another term in any context without changing the
meaning of the definiendum. (Ex: Tiny means small)
3. Definition by Description: this gives description to the
definiendum in such a way that it will give a picture of the term
as there is no appropriate word that will give a good real
definition of such term (Ex: A flashlight is a handy object giving
off battery-powered light)
4. Definition by Example: the definition that gives an example of a
definition for a more concrete understanding of the term (Car-
Toyota)
5. Definition by Illustration: this gives a clear picture of the
definiendum through the use of illustration
6. Ostensive Definition: indicates the meaning of the term by
showing or pointing to the object. Proper names are defined
ostensively. (Ex: What is a pen? That is a pen.)
PHL 2/102
12

ii. Real Definition: the definition that explains the essential properties of
the object represented by the definiendum. It is usually conceived in
terms of the metaphysical definition.
1. Essential Definition: a definition that is constructed by the
genus and specific difference
a. Definition by Genus: that which makes a thing similar to
others
b. Definition by Specific Difference: this is that which
makes a thing different from the others
EX: A square is a polygon with four equal sides.
*The genus of the term square is polygon. Its specific
difference from other polygons is that it has four equal
sides.
2. Non-Essential Definition: this definition gives the more notable
characteristics of a thing
a. Definition by Description: this is what gives the genus a
description in view of a specific difference
i. Definition by Properties: this definition gives the
natural characteristics of a thing that follows
necessarily from the essence of the thing in
question
(Ex: Comedy is a drama of light and amusing
characters and typically has a happy ending)
*the genus is drama and the properties are of
light and amusing characters and typically has a
happy ending.
ii. Definition by Logical Accidents: this definition
explains a thing by giving characteristics that are
contingently connected with it. Description by
logical accidents can be through characteristic
properties, uncharacteristic properties, or of
properties singly or collectively found in the
objects defined.
EX: (characteristic properties) Water is H2O.
PHL 2/102
13

EX: (uncharacteristic properties) Pegasus is a
legendary horse with wings.
EX: (properties found only in the object being
defined) A comet is a bright heavenly body that
has a long tail pointing away from the sun
b. Definition by Cause: this is the definition that states the
cause instead of the specific difference
i. Final Cause: this is used for statement of aims
and for man-made articles especially (Ex: A
thermometer is an instrument used to measure
body temperature.)
ii. Efficient Cause: this is the kind in which the
description of activities point to the cause of
these activities (Ex: Leukemia is a disease caused
by an abnormal increase in the number of
leukocytes in the tissues and often in the blood.)
iii. Material Cause: this refers to the stuff out of
which something else is created (Ex: That statue
is made of marble.)
iv. Formal Cause: that which makes a thing what it
is (Ex: The ice sculpture is in the form of a swan.)
v. Genetic Cause: this is that which gives the
procedure or operation out of which a thing
results; this also gives the mode of origin of a
thing (Ex: This is how to bake a cake. Step 1)
IX. Logic of Propositions
a. Categorical Proposition
i. It is a proposition that makes a direct assertion of agreement or
disagreement between the subject and the predicate. It relates two
classes or categories: the subject term and the predicate term
ii. The general form of a categorical proposition is:
Subject---Copula---Predicate
Ex:
(Quantifier) Subject Copula Predicate
PHL 2/102
14

All philosophers are lovers of wisdom
iii. Four Forms of Categorical Proposition
1. A-Proposition:
a. This asserts that the whole subject class is included in
the predicate class.
b. Quantity: Universal/Singular, Quality: Affirmative
c. All S are P
Ex: All saints are holy people.
Every philosopher is a lover of wisdom.
2. E-Proposition
a. This asserts that the whole subject class is excluded in
the predicate class.
b. Quantity: Universal/Singular, Quality: Negative
c. All S are not P/ No S is P
Ex: All sinners are not holy people.
No sinner is a saint.
3. I-Proposition
a. This asserts that part of subject class is included in the
predicate class.
b. Quantity: Particular, Quality: Affirmative
c. Some S are P
Ex: Some philosophers are atheists.
Many Filipinos are romantic lovers.
4. O-Proposition
a. This asserts that part of subject class is excluded in the
predicate class.
b. Quantity: Particular, Quality: Negative
c. Some S are not P/ Not all S are P
Ex: Some Filipinos are not patriotic.
PHL 2/102
15

Not all Senators are honest politicians.
A-proposition
Universal/Singular
Affirmative
E-proposition
Universal/Singular
Negative
I-proposition
Particular
Affirmative
O-proposition
Particular
Negative

b. The Square of Opposition

c. Rules
PHL 2/102
16

i. Contradictory Opposition (CD): the opposition of a pair of
propositions that have the same subject and predicate but have
different quantity and different quality (A and O propositions; E and I
propositions)
Given Contradictory
True False
False True
Ex: If some students are studious is FALSE, then, all students
are not studious is TRUE.
ii. Contrary Opposition (CT): the opposition of two propositions that
have the same subject and predicate, and the same universal quantity
but are different as to quality (A and E propositions)
Given Contradictory
True False
False Doubtful
Ex: If all bananas are fruits is TRUE, then, no bananas are
fruits will be FALSE.
If all Filipinos are artists is FALSE, then, no Filipino is an
artist is DOUBTFUL.
iii. Sub-Contrary Opposition (SC): the opposition of two propositions
that have the same subject and predicate, and the same particular
quantity but are different as to quality (I and O propositions)
Given Contradictory
True Doubtful
False True
Ex: If some students are music lovers is TRUE, then, some
students are not music lovers will be DOUBTFUL.
If not all saints are martyrs is FALSE, then, some saints are
martyrs is TRUE.
PHL 2/102
17

iv. Sub-Altern Opposition (SA): the opposition of two propositions that
have the same subject and predicate, and the same affirmative quality
or the same negative quality, but are different in terms of quantity (A
and I propositions; E and O propositions)
Given Contradictory
Universal True Particular True
Universal False Particular Doubtful
Particular True Universal Doubtful
Particular False Universal True
Ex: If all students are studious is TRUE, then, some students
are studious is also TRUE.
If no politician is corrupt is FALSE, then, some politicians are
not corrupt is DOUBTFUL.
If some teachers are loving persons is TRUE, then, all
teachers are loving persons is DOUBTFUL.
If some monkeys are flying animals is FALSE, then, all
monkeys are flying animals is also FALSE.

PHL 2/102
18


X. Eduction
Eduction comes from the Latin word educere which means to extract. It is the
process of immediate inference whereby from any given proposition, we
derive another proposition with the same meaning but of different quantity
or quality or both quantity or quality
TYPES OF EDUCTION
a. Obversion (Obv.): the process of forming the equivalent proposition by
changing the quality and the predicate of the given proposition. The given
proposition is called obvertend, while the new proposition is called the
obverse.
i. Applicable to A, E, I, and O propositions. (A->E; E->A; I->O, O->I)
ii. STEPS:
1. Change the quality of the given proposition (the copula)
2. Change the predicate to its contradictory or into its immediate
opposed contrary terms
PHL 2/102
19

3. Retain the subject and the quantity of the given proposition.
OBVERTEND (Given) OBVERSE (New)
A: All S are P E: All S are not non-P/ No S is non-P
E: All S are not P/ No S is P A: All S are non-P
I: Some S are P O: Some S are not non-P/ Not all S are non-P
O: Some S are not P/ Not all S are P I: Some S are non-P
Or
OBVERTEND (Given) OBVERSE (New)
A: All S are non-P E: All S are not P/ No S is P
E: All S are not non-P/ No S is non-P A: All S are P
I: Some S are non-P O: Some S are not P/ Not all S are P
O: Some S are not non-P/ Not all S are non-P I: Some S are P

Ex: Because all Filipinos are Asians, therefore, no Filipino is non-Asian.

b. Conversion (Conv.): the process of forming the equivalent proposition by
transposing the subject and the predicate of the given proposition. The given
proposition is called convertend, while the new proposition is called the
converse.
i. Simple Conversion: applicable to E and I propositions. (E->E; I-> I)
ii. STEPS:
1. Transpose the subject and the predicate
2. Retain the quality and the quantity of the given proposition

CONVERTEND (Given) CONVERSE (New)
E: All S are not P/ No S is P E: All P are not S/ No P is S
I: Some S are P I: Some P are S
PHL 2/102
20


Ex: Since no dog is a cat, no cat is a dog.
iii. Accidental Conversion: applicable to A propositions only. (A->I)
iv. STEPS:
1. Transpose the subject and the predicate
2. Change the quantity of the given universal proposition into
particular
3. Retain the quality of the given proposition

CONVERTEND (Given) CONVERSE (New)
A: All S are P I: Some P are S

Ex: All mangoes are sweet fruits, therefore, some sweet fruits are mangoes.

c. Contraposition: this is the type of immediate inference whereby from the
given proposition, we derive a new proposition of the same meaning through
the use of the combination of obversion and conversion
i. Partial Contraposition (PC): a combination of obversion and
conversion; Applicable to A, E, and O propositions. (A->E; E->I; O->I)
ii. STEPS:
1. Obvert the given proposition
2. Convert the obverse of the given proposition

CONTRAPONEND (Given) PARTIAL CONTRAPOSIT (New)
A: All S are P E: All S are not non-P/ No S is non-P (Obv)
E: All non-P are not S/ No non-P is S
(S.Conv)
E: All S are not P/ No S is P A: All S are non-P (Obv)
I: Some non-P are S. (Acc.Conv)
PHL 2/102
21

O: Some S are not P/ Not all S are P I: Some S are non-P (Obv.)
I: Some non-P are S (S.Conv.)
Ex: All Christians are theists; therefore, no atheists are Christians.
Ex: No college students are illiterate; therefore, some literate are college students.

iii. Full Contraposition: a combination of obversion and conversion and
another obversion; Applicable to A, and O propositions. (A->A; O->O)
iv. STEPS:
1. Obvert the given proposition
2. Convert the obverse of the given proposition
3. Obvert the converse of the obverse of the given proposition

CONTRAPONEND (Given) FULLL CONTRAPOSIT (New)
A: All S are P E: All S are not non-P/ No S is non-P (Obv)
E: All non-P are not S/ No non-P is S
(S.Conv) (PC)
A: All non-P are non-S (Obv) (FC)
O: Some S are not P/ Not all S are P I: Some S are non-P (Obv.)
I: Some non-P are S (S.Conv.) (PC)
O: Some non-P are not non-S/ Not all non-P
are non-S (Obv) (FC)

Ex: Every diagram is a visual aid; therefore, every non-visual aid is a non-diagram.

d. Inversion (Inv.): the process of getting the equivalent proposition wherein
the given proposition would undergo a series of obversions and conversions.
i. Simple Inversion (S.Inv): a process of inferring a new proposition
whereby the subject of the new particular proposition is the
contradictory of the subject of the given universal proposition;
Applicable to A, and E propositions. (A->O; E->I)
ii. STEPS:
PHL 2/102
22

1. Change the subject of the original proposition into its
contradictory or immediately opposed contrary terms
2. Change the universal quantity into particular
3. Change the quality of the proposition
4. Retain the original predicate

INVERTEND (Given) SIMPLE INVERSE (New)
A: All S are P O: Some non-S are not P
E: All S are not P/ No S is P I: Some non-S are P
Ex: All artists are lovers of nature; therefore, not all non-artists are lovers of nature.

iii. Complete Inversion (C.Inv.): consists of inferring a new proposition
whereby the subject and the predicate of the original proposition is
the contradictory of the subject and the predicate of the new
proposition. (A->I; E->O)
iv. STEPS:
1. Change the subject and the predicate of the original
proposition into its contradictory or immediately opposed
contrary terms
2. Change the universal quantity into particular
3. Retain the quality of the original proposition

INVERTEND (Given) COMPLETE INVERSE (New)
A: All S are P I: Some non-S are non-P
E: All S are not P/ No S is P O: Some non-S are not non-P/ Not all non-S
are non-P

Ex: No vegetarian is a meat-lover; therefore, not all non-vegetarians are non-meat
lovers.

PHL 2/102
23



References:
Aguas, A Handbook in Basic Logic.
Buenaflor, The Art of Critical Thinking: Logic for Filipino Students.
Domingo and Cabantac, Rudiments of Reasoning.
Gaarder, Sophies World.
Pinon, Fundamentals of Logic.